Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Dipasquale v. Maroone Ford, LLC

Dipasquale v. Maroone Ford, LLC

954 So. 2d 691, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 5608, 2007 WL 1135688
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 18, 2007
DocketNo. 4D06-1997
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 954 So. 2d 691 (Dipasquale v. Maroone Ford, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dipasquale v. Maroone Ford, LLC, 954 So. 2d 691, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 5608, 2007 WL 1135688 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Tillman v. State, 471 So.2d 32, 35 (Fla.1985) (“In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court ... the specific legal argument ... to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.”); Steinhorst v. State, 412 So.2d 332, 338 (Fla.1982) (“in order for an argument to be cognizable on appeal, it must be the specific contention asserted as legal ground for the objection, exception, or motion below.”).

GUNTHER, STONE and FARMER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, etc v. CHARLES RICHARD STEVENS a/k/a CHARLES R. STEVENS
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2020
Velazquez v. State
954 So. 2d 691 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
954 So. 2d 691, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 5608, 2007 WL 1135688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dipasquale-v-maroone-ford-llc-fladistctapp-2007.